On 09/02/14 19:54, Jerome Leclanche wrote: > On Sun, Feb 9, 2014 at 1:02 AM, Allan McRae <[email protected]> wrote: >> In conclusion, we have the same support for ChangeLog that every other >> package manager has. And I am convinced that the changelog for the >> package is the changelog a package manager should display. >> >> Whether to include a packaging changelog at all and what format it is in >> is a distribution decision. Whether to also include an upstream >> development changelog in the package is also a distributional decision. >> >> I see nothing that needs changed in makepkg/pacman. > > Yeah - I wasn't arguing the current changelog feature needed to be > removed. I was however arguing that we may want to be able to include > upstream changelogs as well in the package. It's fair if arch devs > don't do it for whatever reason, but usually it's just a matter of > adding a single line to the PKGBUILD, once so it's a perfectly > scalable burden, so to say. Packaging changelogs however are a massive > maintenance burden as they need to be updated every release. > So currently, pacman supports a feature nobody uses, and doesn't > support a "fire and forget" feature that applies to thousands of > packages. >
Sure it does. Taking the Debian approach: install -Dm644 ChangeLog $pkgdir/usr/share/doc/$pkgname/ChangeLog Allan
